What's Epistemically Wrong with Conspiracy Theorising?

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 ◽  
pp. 235-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Harris
Keyword(s):  
Modus Tollens ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Target Event

AbstractBelief in conspiracy theories is often taken to be a paradigm of epistemic irrationality. Yet, as I argue in the first half of this paper, standard criticisms of conspiracy theorising fail to demonstrate that the practice is invariably irrational. Perhaps for this reason, many scholars have taken a relatively charitable attitude toward conspiracy theorists and conspiracy theorising in recent years. Still, it would be a mistake to conclude from the defence of conspiracy theorising offered here that belief in conspiracy theories is on an epistemic par with belief in other theories. I argue that a range of epistemic errors are pervasive among conspiracy theorists. First, the refusal of conspiracy theorists to accept the official account of some target event often seems to be due to the exercise of a probabilistic, and fallacious, extension of modus tollens. Additionally, conspiracy theorists tend to be inconsistent in their intellectual attention insofar as the effort they expend on uncovering the truth excludes attention to their own capacities for biased or otherwise erroneous reasoning. Finally, the scepticism with which conspiracy theorists tend to view common sources of information leaves little room for conspiracy theorists to attain positive warrant for their preferred explanations of target events.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and the “Film Your Hospital” Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wasim Ahmed ◽  
Francesc López Seguí ◽  
Josep Vidal-Alaball ◽  
Matthew S Katz
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Network ◽  
Social Network Analysis ◽  
Network Analysis ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Conspiracy Theory ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Twitter Data

BACKGROUND During the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of conspiracy theories have emerged. A popular theory posits that the pandemic is a hoax and suggests that certain hospitals are “empty.” Research has shown that accepting conspiracy theories increases the likelihood that an individual may ignore government advice about social distancing and other public health interventions. Due to the possibility of a second wave and future pandemics, it is important to gain an understanding of the drivers of misinformation and strategies to mitigate it. OBJECTIVE This study set out to evaluate the #FilmYourHospital conspiracy theory on Twitter, attempting to understand the drivers behind it. More specifically, the objectives were to determine which online sources of information were used as evidence to support the theory, the ratio of automated to organic accounts in the network, and what lessons can be learned to mitigate the spread of such a conspiracy theory in the future. METHODS Twitter data related to the #FilmYourHospital hashtag were retrieved and analyzed using social network analysis across a 7-day period from April 13-20, 2020. The data set consisted of 22,785 tweets and 11,333 Twitter users. The Botometer tool was used to identify accounts with a higher probability of being bots. RESULTS The most important drivers of the conspiracy theory are ordinary citizens; one of the most influential accounts is a Brexit supporter. We found that YouTube was the information source most linked to by users. The most retweeted post belonged to a verified Twitter user, indicating that the user may have had more influence on the platform. There was a small number of automated accounts (bots) and deleted accounts within the network. CONCLUSIONS Hashtags using and sharing conspiracy theories can be targeted in an effort to delegitimize content containing misinformation. Social media organizations need to bolster their efforts to label or remove content that contains misinformation. Public health authorities could enlist the assistance of influencers in spreading antinarrative content.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and the “Film Your Hospital” Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data

10.2196/22374 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. e22374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wasim Ahmed ◽  
Francesc López Seguí ◽  
Josep Vidal-Alaball ◽  
Matthew S Katz
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Network ◽  
Social Network Analysis ◽  
Network Analysis ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Conspiracy Theory ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Twitter Data

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of conspiracy theories have emerged. A popular theory posits that the pandemic is a hoax and suggests that certain hospitals are “empty.” Research has shown that accepting conspiracy theories increases the likelihood that an individual may ignore government advice about social distancing and other public health interventions. Due to the possibility of a second wave and future pandemics, it is important to gain an understanding of the drivers of misinformation and strategies to mitigate it. Objective This study set out to evaluate the #FilmYourHospital conspiracy theory on Twitter, attempting to understand the drivers behind it. More specifically, the objectives were to determine which online sources of information were used as evidence to support the theory, the ratio of automated to organic accounts in the network, and what lessons can be learned to mitigate the spread of such a conspiracy theory in the future. Methods Twitter data related to the #FilmYourHospital hashtag were retrieved and analyzed using social network analysis across a 7-day period from April 13-20, 2020. The data set consisted of 22,785 tweets and 11,333 Twitter users. The Botometer tool was used to identify accounts with a higher probability of being bots. Results The most important drivers of the conspiracy theory are ordinary citizens; one of the most influential accounts is a Brexit supporter. We found that YouTube was the information source most linked to by users. The most retweeted post belonged to a verified Twitter user, indicating that the user may have had more influence on the platform. There was a small number of automated accounts (bots) and deleted accounts within the network. Conclusions Hashtags using and sharing conspiracy theories can be targeted in an effort to delegitimize content containing misinformation. Social media organizations need to bolster their efforts to label or remove content that contains misinformation. Public health authorities could enlist the assistance of influencers in spreading antinarrative content.

scholarly journals Do Attitudes, Trust, and Acceptance of Pseudoscience and Conspiracy Theories Predict COVID-19 Vaccination Status?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Grawitch ◽  
Kristi Lavigne
Keyword(s):  
Attitude Change ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Primary Concern ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Conspiracy Theories

Vaccine hesitancy among the general population has become a primary concern for contending with the COVID pandemic as policymakers continue to exhaust options to incentivize individuals and vaccination uptake begins stagnating. The current study explores the relative contributions of several potential predictors of vaccine hesitancy. In an online cross-sectional survey study, 917 individuals from the U.S. were assessed on general and COVID-specific vaccine attitudes, COVID conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs, trust in various sources of information about COVID, and health and safety concerns surrounding the COVID vaccination. COVID vaccine attitudes, as well as general vaccine attitudes and behaviors, explained a substantial amount of variance, with trust in various information sources being moderately predictive of COVID vaccine attitudes. The data indicated a weak relationship between conspiracy and pseudoscientific beliefs, which disappeared altogether upon controlling for other variables. These findings suggest that efforts to confront vaccine hesitancy should go beyond confronting misinformation and consider initiatives aimed at trust enhancement and attitude change in vaccine-hesitant individuals.

Is Conspiracy Theorizing Really Epistemically Problematic?

Episteme ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Kurtis Hagen
Keyword(s):  
Information Sources ◽  
Conspiracy Theory ◽  
Royal Institute ◽  
Modus Tollens ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Epistemic Virtues ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Probabilistic Version

Abstract In an article based on a recent address to the Royal Institute of Philosophy, Keith Harris has argued that there is something epistemically wrong with conspiracy theorizing. Although he finds “standard criticisms” of conspiracy theories wanting, he argues that there are three subtle but significant problems with conspiracy theorizing: (1) It relies on an invalid probabilistic version of modus tollens. (2) It involves a problematic combination of both epistemic virtues and vices. And (3) it lacks an adequate basis for trust in its information sources. In response to Harris, this article argues that, like previous criticisms, these criticisms do little to undermine conspiracy theorizing as such. And they do not give us good reasons to dismiss any particular conspiracy theory without consideration of the relevant evidence.

scholarly journals Understanding Coronavirus

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul Rabadan
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
The Media ◽  
Conflicting Messages ◽  
Unproven Therapies

Since the identification of the first cases of the coronavirus in December 2019, there has been a significant amount of confusion regarding the origin and spread of the so-called 'coronavirus', SARS-CoV-2, and the cause of the disease COVID-19. Conflicting messages from the media and officials across different countries and organizations, the abundance of disparate sources of information, unfounded conspiracy theories on the origins of the virus, unproven therapies, and inconsistent public health measures, have all served to increase anxiety in the population. Where did the virus come from? How is it transmitted? How does it cause disease? Is it like flu? What is a pandemic? In this concise and accessible introduction, a leading expert provides answers to these commonly asked questions. This revised and updated edition now also covers how the virus mutates, how important these mutations are, how vaccines work, and what we can expect in the near and long-term future.

A Probabilistic Interpretation of “If-Then”

1996 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 828-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
In-mao Liu ◽  
King-chung Lo ◽  
Jei-tun Wu
Keyword(s):  
Modus Ponens ◽  
Conditional Reasoning ◽  
General Knowledge ◽  
Probabilistic Interpretation ◽  
Modus Tollens ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Source Of Information ◽  
Perceived Probability ◽  
As If

This study proposes that subjects interpret thematic conditionals (“if p then q”) probabilistically in solving conditional reasoning problems. Experiment 1 found that subjects’ correct responses increased with the perceived probability of q, given p for each of the four forms of conditional arguments: modus ponens (MP), modus tollens (MT), denial of the antecedent (DA), and affirmation of the consequent (AC). Experiment 2 ruled out two alternative explanations based on the comprehensibility of conditionals and on subjects interpreting conditionals as biconditionals. In Experiment 3, subjects solved two types of problems: (a) complete probabilistic problems, such as “If p then q; knowing p; how probable is q?”, and (b) reduced probabilistic problems, such as “Knowing p; how probable is q?” Two sources of information that determine the observable reasoning responses are identified. One source of information is based on one's general knowledge, and another is based on taking all premises into account.

“It's Not Humanly Possible to Do Everything”: Perspectives on Intervention Decision-Making Processes of Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erinn Finke ◽  
Kathryn Drager ◽  
Elizabeth C. Serpentine
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Individual Decision ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Interview Methodology ◽  
Communication Interventions

Purpose The purpose of this investigation was to understand the decision-making processes used by parents of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) related to communication-based interventions. Method Qualitative interview methodology was used. Data were gathered through interviews. Each parent had a child with ASD who was at least four-years-old; lived with their child with ASD; had a child with ASD without functional speech for communication; and used at least two different communication interventions. Results Parents considered several sources of information for learning about interventions and provided various reasons to initiate and discontinue a communication intervention. Parents also discussed challenges introduced once opinions of the school individualized education program (IEP) team had to be considered. Conclusions Parents of children with ASD primarily use individual decision-making processes to select interventions. This discrepancy speaks to the need for parents and professionals to share a common “language” about interventions and the decision-making process.

Spatial Representations as an Emergent Feature of Perceptual Processing

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmund Wascher ◽  
C. Beste
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Vertical Axis ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Integrated Network ◽  
Perceptual Maps ◽  
Emergent Feature ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
Selection Of

Spatial selection of relevant information has been proposed to reflect an emergent feature of stimulus processing within an integrated network of perceptual areas. Stimulus-based and intention-based sources of information might converge in a common stage when spatial maps are generated. This approach appears to be inconsistent with the assumption of distinct mechanisms for stimulus-driven and top-down controlled attention. In two experiments, the common ground of stimulus-driven and intention-based attention was tested by means of event-related potentials (ERPs) in the human EEG. In both experiments, the processing of a single transient was compared to the selection of a physically comparable stimulus among distractors. While single transients evoked a spatially sensitive N1, the extraction of relevant information out of a more complex display was reflected in an N2pc. The high similarity of the spatial portion of these two components (Experiment 1), and the replication of this finding for the vertical axis (Experiment 2) indicate that these two ERP components might both reflect the spatial representation of relevant information as derived from the organization of perceptual maps, just at different points in time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document